There is a episode where Dhrutrashtra needs to decide whom to crown a prince, Yudhisthir or Duryodhan.

He then asks both of them to judge a crime of death, Duryodhan commands them a death sentence. Whilst Yudhisthir gives them seperate sentences based on their castes. He goes on, to be crowned a prince.

Now, I wonder, whether Duryodhan was right with his judgment, as with Yudhisthir's judgement, a shudra, was awarded only 4 years in jail for murder, as he was considered un-educated.

Wouldn't this have encouraged other shudras to perform a similiar act, as they could get just 4 years for murder?

Just wondering......

chitrala

June 11th, 2009, 09:05 AM

Law in most democratic country accept the crime unintentful on the basis of insanity(culpable/inculpable homicide not amounting to murder)...the ground for diffrentiating the act of killing from murder is the ignorance of the accused. If accused didn't know what he was doing then how can law punish them?

Can you say that such laws pose incentives to insane people for committing murder? I don't think so but it certainly has become a moral hazard like problem where murderer can plea for insanity....

Mahabharat justifies the values and laws of its time, contrary to popular perception( Landya Bhai won't agree but still...:)) values change with time..... we can't have those laws in present time....thats why shari'a is crap or vedic laws(mitakshar etc) should not find place in modern codes.

ashdoc

June 11th, 2009, 10:11 AM

Wouldn't this have encouraged other shudras to perform a similiar act, as they could get just 4 years for murder?

Just wondering......

you are making a negative comment on the backward castes implying that they are naturally inclined to acts of crime.

in reality it shows the castiest mentality of those times where backward castes were considered people of inferior intelligence and not fully capable of understanding the implications of what they were doing.

Randheer

June 11th, 2009, 10:33 AM

It was accountability.Brahmins were the highest accountable. BTW Caste was not by birth as both Kripacharya and Dronacharya were Brahmins but worked as Kshatriya.

Caste System originally was a form of captilism to control huge population democratically not Saddam Hussein's style :). Those at the top of Pyramids i.e Brahmins have the maximum accountability and hence maximum punishment.

If you see it was the caste system that kept india Democratic in sprit with such a huge population otherwise we would be having China kind of system.

sunnykode

June 11th, 2009, 11:28 AM

Okay one more Question.

Why was Arjuna named best archer in the whole world by Dronacharya. When there were likes of Bhisma, Lord Parshuram, Lord Krishna, Lord Shiva(arguable) and Dronacharya himself.
Later on when the war starts, they have showed that Bhisma and Dronacharya are invisible and Pandas had to use trickery to defeat them.
Then how come Arjuna is the best?

chitrala

June 11th, 2009, 11:51 AM

It was accountability.Brahmins were the highest accountable. BTW Caste was not by birth as both Kripacharya and Dronacharya were Brahmins but worked as Kshatriya.

Caste System originally was a form of captilism to control huge population democratically not Saddam Hussein's style :). Those at the top of Pyramids i.e Brahmins have the maximum accountability and hence maximum punishment.

If you see it was the caste system that kept india Democratic in sprit with such a huge population otherwise we would be having China kind of system.

Wasnt it the Krip who first raised the matter of Karn's caste?? Talk of hypocrisy. This accountability and punishment theory is all crap.... it was always lower castes who have been swindled of their rights and exploited by upper castes for ages.

Brahminical system was the curse of hinduism to people of the land.

Okay one more Question.

Why was Arjuna named best archer in the whole world by Dronacharya. When there were likes of Bhisma, Lord Parshuram, Lord Krishna, Lord Shiva(arguable) and Dronacharya himself.
Later on when the war starts, they have showed that Bhisma and Dronacharya are invisible and Pandas had to use trickery to defeat them.
Then how come Arjuna is the best?

Interesting point:dontknow:... maybe others didnt participate in ranking:D.... or maybe others like Bhishma, Drona and others were really not good archers and to cover that they used to turn one arrow into thousands, hoping that at least one would hit the enemy. And guess what, most of the time it would hit the enemy.

Parshuram got typecasted into this image because of his name...people believer he could only weild "parshu", but in fact he was a good archer too. Blame it to his parents.

Now the name Parshuram has come up then clarify my doubts. Doesnt the legend go like parshuram cleared the holy earth of Kshatriyas some 21 times.... then how they keep coming up every time after quarantine:D(sorry cant think of any other words)

ashdoc

June 11th, 2009, 12:23 PM

Okay one more Question.

Why was Arjuna named best archer in the whole world by Dronacharya. When there were likes of Bhisma, Lord Parshuram, Lord Krishna, Lord Shiva(arguable) and Dronacharya himself.
Later on when the war starts, they have showed that Bhisma and Dronacharya are invisible and Pandas had to use trickery to defeat them.
Then how come Arjuna is the best?
it shows the strong hindu faith in predetermined destiny above all else.

that a mans station in life is decided before his birth and nothing he does can change it.

arjuna was meant to be the hero in the mahabharata and nothing , nobody could stand in the way, not even people who had talent equal or more than him. it was already written in the stars.

notice how people like karna and eklavya were removed from the path of challenging his supremacy.

eklavya was asked to give his thumb as gurudakshina to drona and karna was not only asked by indra to part with his kavach and kundala , but was given a shaap by his guru that he would forget his mantra when it was needed to release his weapon at the time he needed it most.

sarv_shaktimaan

June 11th, 2009, 12:24 PM

Okay one more Question.

Why was Arjuna named best archer in the whole world by Dronacharya.
just like the baseball world series invites only America, and if I'm correct, japanese teams...

chitrala

June 11th, 2009, 03:40 PM

it shows the strong hindu faith in predetermined destiny above all else.

that a mans station in life is decided before his birth and nothing he does can change it.

arjuna was meant to be the hero in the mahabharata and nothing , nobody could stand in the way, not even people who had talent equal or more than him. it was already written in the stars.

notice how people like karna and eklavya were removed from the path of challenging his supremacy.

eklavya was asked to give his thumb as gurudakshina to drona and karna was not only asked by indra to part with his kavach and kundala , but was given a shaap by his guru that he would forget his mantra when it was needed to release his weapon at the time he needed it most.
few days ago i was reading an interesting old thread on this eklavya topic...some new(for me) stuff was there... let me unearth it...

here it is : Thanks to Dhurlock Holmes again..:)
http://www.echarcha.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13600&highlight=eklavya

ashdoc

June 11th, 2009, 03:53 PM

few days ago i was reading an interesting old thread on this eklavya topic...some new(for me) stuff was there... let me unearth it...

here it is : Thanks to Dhurlock Holmes again..:)
http://www.echarcha.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13600&highlight=eklavya

very interesting discussions you people used to have on echarcha at that time.

i guess i missed it all.

tantric_yogi

June 11th, 2009, 04:25 PM

I find it hard if not difficult to believe that someone actually shat through 857 half-hourly episodes of a boring series ... excruciatingly boring.

My compliments!

swami

June 11th, 2009, 04:25 PM

very interesting discussions you people used to have on echarcha at that time.

i guess i missed it all.
Why do you feel left out ?

The thread is still open :)

ashdoc

June 11th, 2009, 06:44 PM

Why do you feel left out ?

The thread is still open :)

yeah it is still open .thanks. but where are all the pakis ?

anyway i have answered the assholes there to the couple of remarks they have made there. they were needlessly interfering in the eklavya thread. especially that fellow mohammad .

Randheer

June 12th, 2009, 12:27 AM

it was always lower castes who have been swindled of their rights and exploited by upper castes for ages.

Brahminical system was the curse of hinduism to people of the land.

yes Sir fully Agree, I wish we all would have converted to Islam and became an Islamic country then we have treated the so called lower castes with full dignity of Gas Chambers and Chemical Weapons :).

I wish India was a hard core Saudi Arabia kind of Islamic country then my heart fills with glee on what all I could have done to my Maids and my Driver who trouble me so much :D.

ashdoc

June 12th, 2009, 10:28 AM

yes Sir fully Agree, I wish we all would have converted to Islam and became an Islamic country then we have treated the so called lower castes with full dignity of Gas Chambers and Chemical Weapons :).

I wish India was a hard core Saudi Arabia kind of Islamic country then my heart fills with glee on what all I could have done to my Maids and my Driver who trouble me so much :D.

admittedly we are much better than islam. but does it mean that we should neglect the oppression of lower castes.

i am not saying that upper castes are villains or anything at all.

maybe chitralaji calling the brahmanical system a curse is an exaggeration. surely it is an exaggeration. it has had a valuable effect on hinduism through the centuries.

admittedly oppression of lower strata of society by upper classes or in our case upper castes is a 'normal' feature in most cultures.

and we are simply no different from others.

but that does not mean that nobody like chitralaji should not even point his finger at that matter to give it attention.

comparing ourselves with islam is comparing with a brutal system which has destroyed the countries where it is the religion of the majority.

since when did just being better than islam become a certificate for being above reproach ?

BABU_HYDERABADI

June 12th, 2009, 10:56 AM

Okay one more Question.

Why was Arjuna named best archer in the whole world by Dronacharya. When there were likes of Bhisma, Lord Parshuram, Lord Krishna, Lord Shiva(arguable) and Dronacharya himself.
Later on when the war starts, they have showed that Bhisma and Dronacharya are invisible and Pandas had to use trickery to defeat them.
Then how come Arjuna is the best?

Its like comparing all rounders with specialist bowlers.

BABU_HYDERABADI

June 12th, 2009, 11:00 AM

I find it hard if not difficult to believe that someone actually shat through 857 half-hourly episodes of a boring series ... excruciatingly boring.

My compliments!

Amar chitra katha, chandamama and TV ramayan and mahabarath were the only ways one could get to know about these Indian mythologies. with the first two, children tend to only know bits and pieces of the story, but with TV one could get the whole gist.

BTW i do remember, even in summer during the peak season when we used to have power disruptions for 3-6 hours/day. state govt declared that they would not have power cuts during the telecast of mahabarath. And that was the power of the show.

dhurandhar

June 12th, 2009, 12:39 PM

Okay one more Question.

Why was Arjuna named best archer in the whole world by Dronacharya. When there were likes of Bhisma, Lord Parshuram, Lord Krishna, Lord Shiva(arguable) and Dronacharya himself.
Later on when the war starts, they have showed that Bhisma and Dronacharya are invisible and Pandas had to use trickery to defeat them.
Then how come Arjuna is the best?

If they were invisible how did Arjun fight them? and how dare the B R Chopra show them during the battle scenes?:D

sunnykode

June 12th, 2009, 01:58 PM

If they were invisible how did Arjun fight them? and how dare the B R Chopra show them during the battle scenes?:D
only u can come up with this:D

User Name

June 12th, 2009, 08:50 PM

If they were invisible how did Arjun fight them? :D

laal chashma pehen ke (Mr. india style):D

Mahabharat scene from movie "jaane bhi do yaaro" is more entertaining than BR chopra's version:clap:

sunnykode

June 12th, 2009, 09:02 PM

did any one watch "Kahani Humare Mahabharat ki"
I saw the promo and that summed it up

krantikari

June 12th, 2009, 09:23 PM

Okay one more Question.

Why was Arjuna named best archer in the whole world by Dronacharya. When there were likes of Bhisma, Lord Parshuram, Lord Krishna, Lord Shiva(arguable) and Dronacharya himself.
Later on when the war starts, they have showed that Bhisma and Dronacharya are invisible and Pandas had to use trickery to defeat them.
Then how come Arjuna is the best?

Check this out... look where the creep Shakuni came from :D :D even today, things didn't change.

Also it seems of all the Pandavas, Arjuna chose bow and arrow as his weapon. Bheema chose gada as he said he didn't want to summon other demigods and fight only on the basis of his physical strength... Nakul and Sehdev shose spears as their weapons. Yudhistra I believe chose sword as his weapon.... however this site where I picked the photo from says he was an archer.... Well, all Pandavs were well trained in archery... only they chose different weapons.... So in archery, Arjun was best. Interestingly, Duryodhan's life's sole aim was to defeat Bheema.... so he decided to take up gada as his weapon too.

Arjuna was indeed better in archery than the rest of the gang that you mention. He later defeats all of them combined in a combat where he singlehandedly fought them with the coward Uttara as his sarathi during the end of the Pandav's agyatwas.

http://onepagetoknowledge.com/mahabharat

chitrala

June 12th, 2009, 11:37 PM

yes Sir fully Agree, I wish we all would have converted to Islam and became an Islamic country then we have treated the so called lower castes with full dignity of Gas Chambers and Chemical Weapons :).

I wish India was a hard core Saudi Arabia kind of Islamic country then my heart fills with glee on what all I could have done to my Maids and my Driver who trouble me so much :D.

How bloody convenient.... show any argument sympathetic to islam and win the debate..... right?? Reeks of congress style :D....

Though casteism is rampant all over india, but someone hailing from UP(an intelligent fellow like yours) supporting it baffles me completely..... not everything our ancestors practised could be right, right??
mind my asking which ward you belong to... for or back?? If you ask me the same then I think I have answered it somewhere before...

Randheer

June 13th, 2009, 12:52 AM

Though casteism is rampant all over india, but someone hailing from UP(an intelligent fellow like yours) supporting it baffles me completely..... not everything our ancestors practised could be right, right??
mind my asking which ward you belong to... for or back?? If you ask me the same then I think I have answered it somewhere before...

I am a Kshtariya but you guys only know castes from Indian Government Gazzete. Manu Smruti didn't defined OBC or SC/ST :D.

In fact all OBCs which you see today like Yadavs,Kurmis were kshatriyas :). Chandra Gupta Maurya was from Mura Caste which is a BC and not even OBC :)

Similarly in south Naidus etc were Kshatriyas. Kalyan Singh a Lodh(SC) is Kshatriya.

Do you know Paasi(Ram Vilas Paswan) consider them to be kshatriya though officially they are dalit :) and thats why with a little bit money and position Paswan acts with much prudence than original Kshatriyas. :D

Tommorow if Rajput get themselves into OBC quota(expect soon,courtesy Amar Singh :)) will Rajputs become a backward caste and exploited for 5000 years.

I was talking of Casteism of Rig vedic period and not that practiced by Samajwadi party and RJD :)

BABU_HYDERABADI

June 13th, 2009, 09:41 AM

I am a Kshtariya but you guys only know castes from Indian Government Gazzete. Manu Smruti didn't defined OBC or SC/ST :D.

In fact all OBCs which you see today like Yadavs,Kurmis were kshatriyas :). Chandra Gupta Maurya was from Mura Caste which is a BC and not even OBC :)

Similarly in south Naidus etc were Kshatriyas. Kalyan Singh a Lodh(SC) is Kshatriya.

Do you know Paasi(Ram Vilas Paswan) consider them to be kshatriya though officially they are dalit :) and thats why with a little bit money and position Paswan acts with much prudence than original Kshatriyas. :D

Tommorow if Rajput get themselves into OBC quota(expect soon,courtesy Amar Singh :)) will Rajputs become a backward caste and exploited for 5000 years.

I was talking of Casteism of Rig vedic period and not that practiced by Samajwadi party and RJD :)
In short every one other than brahmin is a backward caste.

Rakhi

June 18th, 2009, 11:12 AM

I am a big fan of Mahabharat and am watching it back on DVD now.

There is a episode where Dhrutrashtra needs to decide whom to crown a prince, Yudhisthir or Duryodhan.

He then asks both of them to judge a crime of death, Duryodhan commands them a death sentence. Whilst Yudhisthir gives them seperate sentences based on their castes. He goes on, to be crowned a prince.

Now, I wonder, whether Duryodhan was right with his judgment, as with Yudhisthir's judgement, a shudra, was awarded only 4 years in jail for murder, as he was considered un-educated.

Wouldn't this have encouraged other shudras to perform a similiar act, as they could get just 4 years for murder?

Just wondering......

The story of Mahabharata is kind of one sided. Like a few of us have discussed this here before, it was written in favor of Pandavaís (the ones who won in the end). In those days a Shudra, who was uneducated, is as good an insane person (correct me if I am wrong), who cannot judge what is right and what is wrong. And I reckon thatís why Yudhisthir was chosen for the discretion.

In similar way, now a minor cannot be given capital punishment in these days. May be in near future a bill will be passed where minors are also not exempted? It is possible right.

Your question if Dhrutrashtra was right and would it has encouraged the Shudras to perform similar acts; yes, it would have. Else, in these days we would still be giving limited punishment to uneducated flocks.

The values will not change with time, but sure the laws will to accommodate the social changes.....my opinion.

HarHarMahaDev

June 18th, 2009, 12:45 PM

I have read the entire Mahabharat a couple of times and the Bhagavad Gita several times and have a strong opinion about this topic. I like the question posed by the poster, because it cuts to the heart of the Bhagavad Gita.

First of all, is the Mahabharata a fairy tale or a depiction of actual events? I think it was based on an actual event, but was then re-written to suit the victors. The authors of the tale did a fantastic job capturing the facts, but did a lousy job of rewriting it (maybe on purpose). This should be evident by the names given to the "villians" - Duryodhana / Dushasana. Do you really think Dhritarashtra, would loved his son dearly, would give such a rabid name?

Anyhow, back to topic. In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna clearly defines the term 'Dharma'. Dharma means performing duties defined by your birth. A brahmin by birth remains a brahmin, a trader's children remain traders, so on and so forth. There was clear categorization and separation of duties. The job of Kshatriyas was to protect the Dharma - make sure that every individual performed duties (Karma) assigned by birthright (varna)! Most of the Bhagavad Gita is about the importance of this social architecture and what role each caste plays in society. If that makes them casteist, then so be it.

However, I think the Brahmins were responsible for inventing two extremely vital historical concepts. 1. Caste-based order - which provides for separation of duties and 2. A monetary order - as metaphorically described in the "kshirsagar" episode. Because of these two concepts, mankind was able to make a gigantic leap forward in creativity and prosperity, since it allows for specialization of skills! India might have become an extremely prosperous country and so the idea may have been to enforce the caste-based order to preserve their prosperity. I may have glossed over my thoughts, but I know it's profound and worthy of an award!!

At any rate. If you accept my argument about Dharma - then it becomes very obvious why Yudhishtir would have judged based solely on caste. He was, after all, the "Dharmaraj"!

krantikari

June 18th, 2009, 01:15 PM

I have read the entire Mahabharat a couple of times and the Bhagavad Gita several times and have a strong opinion about this topic. I like the question posed by the poster, because it cuts to the heart of the Bhagavad Gita.

:up:

First of all, is the Mahabharata a fairy tale or a depiction of actual events? I think it was based on an actual event, but was then re-written to suit the victors. The authors of the tale did a fantastic job capturing the facts, but did a lousy job of rewriting it (maybe on purpose).

I don't agree with everything you said here. And there was only one author of the epic.

This should be evident by the names given to the "villians" - Duryodhana / Dushasana. Do you really think Dhritarashtra, would loved his son dearly, would give such a rabid name?

Not at all... Duryodhan = Hard to conquer
Dushasana = Hard to control (due to the characteristics he showed upon his birth.)

Anyhow, back to topic. In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna clearly defines the term 'Dharma'. Dharma means performing duties defined by your birth.

Don't know which translation you read. Dharma is the first of the four purusharthaas (Dharma, Artha, Kaama, Moksha). The literal meaning of Dharma is "property", as in "the properties of water is to be colorless, tasteless and Odorless". So all humans have same dharmas. Now to how much extent is true to one's dharmas depend on the defects of each soul.

A brahmin by birth remains a brahmin, a trader's children remain traders, so on and so forth. There was clear categorization and separation of duties. The job of Kshatriyas was to protect the Dharma - make sure that every individual performed duties (Karma) assigned by birthright (varna)! Most of the Bhagavad Gita is about the importance of this social architecture and what role each caste plays in society. If that makes them casteist, then so be it.

So be it. There are criteria defined for which a Brahman can lose his caste and many rules like that.

However, I think the Brahmins were responsible for inventing two extremely vital historical concepts. 1. Caste-based order - which provides for separation of duties and 2. A monetary order - as metaphorically described in the "kshirsagar" episode. Because of these two concepts, mankind was able to make a gigantic leap forward in creativity and prosperity, since it allows for specialization of skills! India might have become an extremely prosperous country and so the idea may have been to enforce the caste-based order to preserve their prosperity. I may have glossed over my thoughts, but I know it's profound and worthy of an award!!

Bajaofy apni bean.

At any rate. If you accept my argument about Dharma - then it becomes very obvious why Yudhishtir would have judged based solely on caste. He was, after all, the "Dharmaraj"!

He was Dharmaraj as he displayed characteristics of an ideal person. However, there are instances when his behavior was not very ideal.

sunnykode

June 18th, 2009, 02:38 PM

his should be evident by the names given to the "villians" - Duryodhana / Dushasana. Do you really think Dhritarashtra, would loved his son dearly, would give such a rabid name?

!

He had to name 99 sons and 1 girl. He had to be creative. So cannot read too much into name.
And wasn't the names in those days given by Rhishi Munis:dontknow:. I might be wrong

krantikari

June 18th, 2009, 03:02 PM

He had to name 99 sons ...

100 sons I believe.

You know how they were born ?

By the way !! Drithrastra had 101 sons... One of them left Kaurava army and joined Pandavas before the battle began when Yudhistra invited anybody from opponents to join his army.

ashdoc

June 18th, 2009, 03:11 PM

100 sons I believe.

You know how they were born ?

By the way !! Drithrastra had 101 sons... One of them left Kaurava army and joined Pandavas before the battle began when Yudhistra invited anybody from opponents to join his army.

totally 100 sons . 99 fought on side of kaurava army , one against.

chitrala

June 18th, 2009, 03:19 PM

totally 100 sons . 99 fought on side of kaurava army , one against.
100 sons and one daughter I believe... the one who fought for pandavs was Yuyutsu and the girl's name was Duhshala(dushala) if I remember correctly.

Both Duryodhan and Duhshahshan were supposed to be called Suyodhan and Sushashan. Looks like they wanted to form D company and changed their name.... their deeds changed their name....

chitrala

June 18th, 2009, 03:28 PM

I have read the entire Mahabharat a couple of times and the Bhagavad Gita several times and have a strong opinion about this topic. I like the question posed by the poster, because it cuts to the heart of the Bhagavad Gita.

First of all, is the Mahabharata a fairy tale or a depiction of actual events? I think it was based on an actual event, but was then re-written to suit the victors. The authors of the tale did a fantastic job capturing the facts, but did a lousy job of rewriting it (maybe on purpose). This should be evident by the names given to the "villians" - Duryodhana / Dushasana. Do you really think Dhritarashtra, would loved his son dearly, would give such a rabid name?

Anyhow, back to topic. In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna clearly defines the term 'Dharma'. Dharma means performing duties defined by your birth. A brahmin by birth remains a brahmin, a trader's children remain traders, so on and so forth. There was clear categorization and separation of duties. The job of Kshatriyas was to protect the Dharma - make sure that every individual performed duties (Karma) assigned by birthright (varna)! Most of the Bhagavad Gita is about the importance of this social architecture and what role each caste plays in society. If that makes them casteist, then so be it.

However, I think the Brahmins were responsible for inventing two extremely vital historical concepts. 1. Caste-based order - which provides for separation of duties and 2. A monetary order - as metaphorically described in the "kshirsagar" episode. Because of these two concepts, mankind was able to make a gigantic leap forward in creativity and prosperity, since it allows for specialization of skills! India might have become an extremely prosperous country and so the idea may have been to enforce the caste-based order to preserve their prosperity. I may have glossed over my thoughts, but I know it's profound and worthy of an award!!

At any rate. If you accept my argument about Dharma - then it becomes very obvious why Yudhishtir would have judged based solely on caste. He was, after all, the "Dharmaraj"!

I maintain values change with time.... because our perception of truth, justice and righteousness change with time. So regardless the factuality and fictionality of mahabharat , one cannot justify it in our time.

Remember Pandavs first asked for half of the empire, being refused they wanted five villages when even that was not granted they won it on might.
There should not be any complaints or grievances on Duryodhan's part. He lost it despite having a bigger army.

Duryodhan would have never fought the battle had he thought he would lose the battle....he lost it fair and square, why complain. The morality of the tale is of its times. We can't gain much from it today. That's why it seems unjust, unfair and unethical.

krantikari

June 18th, 2009, 03:41 PM

100 sons and one daughter I believe... the one who fought for pandavs was Yuyutsu and the girl's name was Duhshala(dushala) if I remember correctly.

Both Duryodhan and Duhshahshan were supposed to be called Suyodhan and Sushashan. Looks like they wanted to form D company and changed their name.... their deeds changed their name....

I find it hard if not difficult to believe that someone actually shat through 857 half-hourly episodes of a boring series ... excruciatingly boring.

My compliments!He must be watching such genre for first time. That's why . . . Recall what effect Raj Kapoor's Awaara had on Russians. Because it was the first of that genre that they saw.

tantric_yogi

June 19th, 2009, 08:25 AM

Sutradarji ... thanks. Apologies again. I will behave. :D

Copy/paste

Hereunder is provided a short table dates of important Mahabharat events in years. (Dates and Tithis in years in Rama Samvat assuming Shri Rama Samvat 1st January. 1 equivalent to 1st Jan 7323 B.C. Rama's birth date has been conclusively proved to be 4th Dec. 7323 B.C.( "Vastav Ramayan").